header-logo header-logo

DOMICILE

26 June 2008
Issue: 7327 / Categories: Case law , Public , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Henwood v Barlow Clowes International Ltd (in liquidation) and others [2008] EWCA Civ 577, [2008] All ER (D) 330 (May)

(i) A person is, in general, domiciled in the country in which he is considered by English law to have his permanent home. A person may sometimes be domiciled in a country although he does not have his permanent home in it. (ii) No person can be without a domicile.
(iii) No person can at the same time for the same purpose have more than one domicile.
(iv) An existing domicile is presumed to continue until it is proved that a new domicile has been acquired.
(v) Every person receives at birth a domicile of origin.
(vi) Every person can acquire a domicile of choice by the combination of residence and an intention of permanent or indefinite residence (the intention of residence must be fixed and must be for the indefinite future). (vii) Any circumstance that is evidence of a person’s residence, or of his intention to reside permanently or indefinitely in a country, must be considered in determining whether he has acquired a domicile of choice. (viii) In determining whether a person intends to reside permanently or indefinitely, the court may have regard to the motive for which residence was taken up. (ix) A person abandons a domicile of choice by ceasing to reside there and by ceasing to intend to reside there permanently, or indefinitely. (x) When a domicile of choice is abandoned, a new domicile of choice may be acquired, but, if it is not acquired, the domicile of origin revives (Lady Justice Arden at 8).
 

Issue: 7327 / Categories: Case law , Public , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll